Loic Belle

Comparison of Thrombolysis Followed by Broad Use of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction : Data From the French Registry on Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI)

Background— Intravenous thrombolysis remains a widely used treatment for ST-elevation myocardial infarction; however, it carries a higher risk of reinfarction than primary PCI (PPCI). There are few data comparing PPCI with thrombolysis followed by routine angiography and PCI. The purpose of the present study was to assess contemporary outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients, with specific emphasis on comparing a pharmacoinvasive strategy (thrombolysis followed by routine angiography) with PPCI. Methods and Results— This nationwide registry in France included 223 centers and 1714 patients over a 1-month period at the end of 2005, with 1-year follow-up. Sixty percent of the patients underwent reperfusion therapy, 33% with PPCI and 29% with intravenous thrombolysis (18% prehospital). At baseline, the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events score was similar in thrombolysis and PPCI patients. Time to initiation of reperfusion therapy was significantly shorter in thrombolysis than in PPCI (median 130 versus 300 minutes). After thrombolysis, 96% of patients had coronary angiography, and 84% had subsequent PCI (58% within 24 hours). In-hospital mortality was 4.3% for thrombolysis and 5.0% for PPCI. In patients with thrombolysis, 30-day mortality was 9.2% when PCI was not used and 3.9% when PCI was subsequently performed (4.0% if PCI was performed in the same hospital and 3.3% if performed after transfer to another facility). One-year survival was 94% for thrombolysis and 92% for PPCI (P=0.31). After propensity score matching, 1-year survival was 94% and 93%, respectively. Conclusions— When used early after the onset of symptoms, a pharmacoinvasive strategy that combines thrombolysis with a liberal use of PCI yields early and 1-year survival rates that are comparable to those of PPCI.

Cyclosporine before PCI in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND Experimental and clinical evidence suggests that cyclosporine may attenuate reperfusion injury and reduce myocardial infarct size. We aimed to test whether cyclosporine would improve clinical outcomes and prevent adverse left ventricular remodeling. METHODS In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned 970 patients with an acute anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who were undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 12 hours after symptom onset and who had complete occlusion of the culprit coronary artery to receive a bolus injection of cyclosporine (administered intravenously at a dose of 2.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo before coronary recanalization. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, worsening of heart failure during the initial hospitalization, rehospitalization for heart failure, or adverse left ventricular remodeling at 1 year. Adverse left ventricular remodeling was defined as an increase of 15% or more in the left ventricular end-diastolic volume. RESULTS A total of 395 patients in the cyclosporine group and 396 in the placebo group received the assigned study drug and had data that could be evaluated for the primary outcome at 1 year. The rate of the primary outcome was 59.0% in the cyclosporine group and 58.1% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.39; P=0.77). Cyclosporine did not reduce the incidence of the separate clinical components of the primary outcome or other events, including recurrent infarction, unstable angina, and stroke. No significant difference in the safety profile was observed between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with anterior STEMI who had been referred for primary PCI, intravenous cyclosporine did not result in better clinical outcomes than those with placebo and did not prevent adverse left ventricular remodeling at 1 year. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and NeuroVive Pharmaceutical; CIRCUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01502774; EudraCT number, 2009-013713-99.).

Clinical profile, prognostic implication, and response to treatment of pulmonary hypertension in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

The incidence, correlates, and prognostic implications of pulmonary hypertension (PH) are unclear in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). We studied 509 patients with severe AS evaluated for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Patients were divided into groups based on pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP): group I, 161 (31.6%) with PASP <40 mm Hg; group II, 175 (34.3%) with PASP 40 to 59 mm Hg; and group III, 173 (33.9%) with PASP ≥ 60 mm Hg. Group III patients were more symptomatic and had higher creatinine levels and higher left ventricular end-diastolic pressure. Transpulmonary gradient was >12 mm Hg in 17 patients (10.5%), 31 patients (17.7%), and 80 patients (46.2%) in groups I through III, respectively. In a median follow-up of 202 days (73 to 446) mortality rates were 35 (21.7%), 69 (39.3%), and 85 (49.1%) in groups I through III, respectively (p <0.001). Immediately after TAVI, in patients with PASP >40 mm Hg there was significant decrease in PASP (63.1 ± 16.2 to 48.8 ± 12.4 mm Hg, p <0.0001), which remained at 1 year (50.1 ± 13.1 mm Hg, p = 0.04). After surgical aortic valve replacement there was a significant immediate decrease in PASP (66.1 ± 16.3 to 44.7 ± 14.2 mm Hg, p <0.0001), which persisted at 3 to 12 months (44.8 ± 20.1 mm Hg, p <0.001). In patients who underwent balloon aortic valvuloplasty, PASP decreased immediately after the procedure (63.2 ± 14.8 to 51.8 ± 17.1 mm Hg, p <0.0001), yet at 3 to 12 months pressure returned to baseline levels (57.4 ± 17.0 mm Hg, p = 0.29). In conclusion, patients with severe AS have a high prevalence of PH, and in patients with severe AS increased PASP is associated with increased mortality. Surgical aortic valve replacement and TAVI are effective treatments for these patients and result in a significant PASP decrease.

Outcome Impact of Coronary Revascularization Strategy Reclassification With Fractional Flow Reserve at Time of Diagnostic Angiography Insights From a Large French Multicenter Fractional Flow Reserve Registry

Background— There is no large report of the impact of fractional flow reserve (FFR) on the reclassification of the coronary revascularization strategy on individual patients referred for diagnostic angiography. Methods and Results— The Registre Français de la FFR (R3F) investigated 1075 consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic angiography including an FFR investigation at 20 French centers. Investigators were asked to define prospectively their revascularization strategy a priori based on angiography before performing the FFR. The final revascularization strategy, reclassification of the strategy by FFR, and 1-year clinical follow-up were prospectively recorded. The strategy a priori based on angiography was medical therapy in 55% and revascularization in 45% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 38%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 7%). Patients were treated according to FFR in 1028/1075 (95.7%). The applied strategy after FFR was medical therapy in 58% and revascularization in 42% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 32%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 10%). The final strategy applied differed from the strategy a priori in 43% of cases: in 33% of a priori medical patients, in 56% of patients undergoing a priori percutaneous coronary intervention, and in 51% of patients undergoing a priori coronary artery bypass surgery. In reclassified patients treated based on FFR and in disagreement with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=464), the 1-year outcome (major cardiac event, 11.2%) was as good as in patients in whom final applied strategy concurred with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=611; major cardiac event, 11.9%; log-rank, P=0.78). At 1 year, >93% patients were asymptomatic without difference between reclassified and nonreclassified patients (Generalized Linear Mixed Model, P=0.75). Reclassification safety was preserved in high-risk patients. Conclusion— This study shows that performing FFR during diagnostic angiography is associated with reclassification of the revascularization decision in about half of the patients. It further demonstrates that it is safe to pursue a revascularization strategy divergent from that suggested by angiography but guided by FFR.

Mechanisms of stent thrombosis analysed by optical coherence tomography: insights from the national PESTO French registry

AIMS Angiography has limited value for identifying the causes of stent thrombosis (ST). We studied a large cohort of patients by optical coherence tomography (OCT) to explore ST characteristics and mechanisms. METHODS AND RESULTS A prospective multicentre registry was screened for patients with confirmed ST. Optical coherence tomography was performed after initial intervention to the culprit lesion (in 69% of cases in a deferred procedure). Stent thrombosis was classified as acute (AST), sub-acute (SAST), late (LST), and very late (VLST). Optical coherence tomography records were analysed in a central core lab. The analysis included 120 subjects aged 61.7 [51.4-70.7]; 89% male. Very late ST was the clinical presentation in 75%, LST in 6%, SAST in 15%, and AST in 4% of patients. Bare metal stents (BMS) were used in 39%, drug-eluting stents (DES) in 59% and bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in 2% of the cases. Optical coherence tomography identified an underlying morphological abnormality in 97% of cases, including struts malapposition (34%), neoatherosclerotic lesions (22%), major stent underexpansion (11%), coronary evagination (8%), isolated uncovered struts (8%), edge-related disease progression (8%), and neointimal hyperplasia (4%). Ruptured neoatherosclerotic lesions were more frequent with BMS than with DES (36 vs. 14%, P = 0.005), whereas coronary evaginations were more frequent with DES than with BMS (12 vs. 2%, P = 0.04). LST + VLST were mainly related to malapposition (31%) and neoatherosclerosis (28%), while prominent mechanisms for AST + SAST were malapposition (48%) and underexpansion (26%). CONCLUSION In patients with confirmed ST, OCT imaging identified an underlying morphological abnormality in 97% of cases.

Outcome Impact of Coronary Revascularization Strategy Reclassification With Fractional Flow Reserve at Time of Diagnostic Angiography

Background— There is no large report of the impact of fractional flow reserve (FFR) on the reclassification of the coronary revascularization strategy on individual patients referred for diagnostic angiography. Methods and Results— The Registre Français de la FFR (R3F) investigated 1075 consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic angiography including an FFR investigation at 20 French centers. Investigators were asked to define prospectively their revascularization strategy a priori based on angiography before performing the FFR. The final revascularization strategy, reclassification of the strategy by FFR, and 1-year clinical follow-up were prospectively recorded. The strategy a priori based on angiography was medical therapy in 55% and revascularization in 45% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 38%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 7%). Patients were treated according to FFR in 1028/1075 (95.7%). The applied strategy after FFR was medical therapy in 58% and revascularization in 42% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 32%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 10%). The final strategy applied differed from the strategy a priori in 43% of cases: in 33% of a priori medical patients, in 56% of patients undergoing a priori percutaneous coronary intervention, and in 51% of patients undergoing a priori coronary artery bypass surgery. In reclassified patients treated based on FFR and in disagreement with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=464), the 1-year outcome (major cardiac event, 11.2%) was as good as in patients in whom final applied strategy concurred with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=611; major cardiac event, 11.9%; log-rank, P=0.78). At 1 year, >93% patients were asymptomatic without difference between reclassified and nonreclassified patients (Generalized Linear Mixed Model, P=0.75). Reclassification safety was preserved in high-risk patients. Conclusion— This study shows that performing FFR during diagnostic angiography is associated with reclassification of the revascularization decision in about half of the patients. It further demonstrates that it is safe to pursue a revascularization strategy divergent from that suggested by angiography but guided by FFR.

Five-Year Survival in Patients With ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction According to Modalities of Reperfusion Therapy The French Registry on Acute ST-Elevation and Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) 2005 Cohort

Background— Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the preferred reperfusion method for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction, it remains difficult to implement in many areas, and fibrinolytic therapy is still widely used. Methods and Results— We assessed 5-year mortality in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction from the French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) 2005 according to use and type of reperfusion therapy. Of 1492 patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction with a first call ⩽12 hours from onset, 447 (30%) received fibrinolysis (66% prehospital; 97% with subsequent angiography, 84% with subsequent PCI), 583 (39%) had pPCI, and 462 (31%) received no reperfusion. Crude 5-year survival was 88% for the fibrinolytic-based strategy, 83% for pPCI, and 59% for no reperfusion. Adjusted hazard ratios for 5-year death were 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.50–1.06) for fibrinolysis versus pPCI, 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.36–0.88) for prehospital fibrinolysis versus pPCI, and 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.34–0.91) for fibrinolysis versus pPCI beyond 90 minutes of call in patients having called ⩽180 minutes from onset. In propensity score–matched populations, however, survival rates were not significantly different for fibrinolysis and pPCI, both in the whole population (88% lysis, 85% pPCI) and in the population seen early (87% fibrinolysis, 85% pPCI beyond 90 minutes from call). Conclusions— In a real-world setting, on a nationwide scale, a pharmaco-invasive strategy constitutes a valid alternative to pPCI, with 5-year survival at least equivalent to that of the reference reperfusion method. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00673036.

Antiplatelet therapy in patients with anticoagulants undergoing percutaneous coronary stenting (from STENTIng and oral antiCOagulants [STENTICO]).

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy, in association with oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy, in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The use of this triple therapy increases the rate of adverse outcomes, as shown by retrospective studies. In this first prospective multicenter registry STENTIng and oral antiCOagulation (STENTICO), all patients with OAC therapy undergoing PCI were included and followed up at 2 and 12 months. A total of 359 patients were included from 40 French centers. In 234 (65.2%; group 1) of these 359 patients, OAC therapy was discontinued (22 +/- 31 days). In 125 patients (34.8%; group 2), triple therapy was continued. The baseline characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. In group 2, a radial approach was more often used (65.6% vs 43.8%, p = 0.003), fewer drug-eluting stents were implanted (33.3% vs 24.8%, p = 0.06), and fewer anti-glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists were prescribed (5.6% vs 8.5%, p = 0.02). The stroke rate did not differ significantly, at 3.0% (95% confidence interval 0.8% to 5.2%) for group 1 versus 0.8% (95% confidence interval -0.8% to 2.4%) in group 2. Severe and moderate bleeding, according to the Global Use of Strategies to Open Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) criteria, occurred in 2.1% and 6.4% of groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.04). A significant difference in bleeding risk was found between the femoral and radial approaches (10.3% vs 3.8%, respectively; p = 0.01). In conclusion, adding dual antiplatelet therapy to pre-existing OAC therapy increases the post-PCI bleeding risk. Temporary discontinuation decreased this bleeding risk but tended to increase the risk of stroke. A radial approach for PCI could be a good alternative to the conventional femoral route to avoid bleeding.

Optical Coherence Tomography to Optimize Results of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Results of the Multicenter, Randomized DOCTORS Study (Does Optical Coherence Tomography Optimize Results of Stenting).

Background: No randomized study has investigated the value of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in optimizing the results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized study involving 240 patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes to compare OCT-guided PCI (use of OCT pre- and post-PCI; OCT-guided group) to fluoroscopy-guided PCI (angiography-guided group). The primary end point was the functional result of PCI assessed by the measure of post PCI fractional flow reserve. Secondary end points included procedural complications and type 4a periprocedural myocardial infarction. Safety was assessed by the rate of acute kidney injury. Results: OCT use led to a change in procedural strategy in 50% of the patients in the OCT-guided group. The primary end point was improved in the OCT-guided group, with a significantly higher fractional flow reserve value (0.94±0.04 versus 0.92±0.05, P=0.005) compared with the angiography-guided group. There was no significant difference in the rate of type 4a myocardial infarction (33% in the OCT-group versus 40% in the angiography-guided group, P=0.28). The rates of procedural complications (5.8%) and acute kidney injury (1.6%) were identical in each group despite longer procedure time and use of more contrast medium in the OCT-guided group. Post-PCI OCT revealed stent underexpansion in 42% of patients, stent malapposition in 32%, incomplete lesion coverage in 20%, and edge dissection in 37.5%. This led to the more frequent use of poststent overdilation in the OCT-guided group versus the angiography-guided group (43% versus 12.5%, P<0.0001) with lower residual stenosis (7.0±4.3% versus 8.7±6.3%, P=0.01). Conclusions: In patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, OCT-guided PCI is associated with higher postprocedure fractional flow reserve than PCI guided by angiography alone. OCT did not increase periprocedural complications, type 4a myocardial infarction, or acute kidney injury. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01743274.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Monotherapy on Ischemic and Bleeding Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

With femoral access, bivalirudin decreases risks of major bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and provides better net clinical benefit compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) plus planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Whether this benefit exists compared to UFH monotherapy is less clear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral PCI with UFH or bivalirudin. Randomized trials (n = 3) and observational studies (n = 13) comparing bivalirudin to UFH monotherapy were reviewed. Primary outcomes were 30-day rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) including death, myocardial infarction (MI), urgent revascularization, as well as all-cause mortality, MI, major bleeding, and blood transfusion. We collected data from 16 studies involving 32,492 patients undergoing PCI. Most observational studies were performed in the United States, whereas all randomized trials were done in Europe. Compared to UFH monotherapy, bivalirudin was associated with similar risk of MACEs (odds ratios [OR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75 to 1.12), a substantial 45% relative decrease in major bleeding (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.72), and a trend in the decrease of transfusion (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.08). A decrease in mortality was seen in observational studies (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85) but remained inconclusive in randomized trials (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.01). MI rate was similar with the 2 anticoagulants. In conclusion, in patients undergoing transfemoral PCI, the benefit of bivalirudin over UFH monotherapy is driven by a significant decrease in major bleeding with similar rates of MACE. As PCI practice moves toward other bleeding-avoidance strategies such as the radial approach, future studies should focus on the interaction between anticoagulant strategy and access-site choice.